“Marriage is a religious institution. The federal government has no business redefining what it is,” DeMint says. This is one issue where he doesn’t support states’ rights; state government shouldn’t have the right to permit gay marriage: “Governments should not be in the business of promoting a behavior that’s proven to be destructive to our society.”

He cringes at the notion of a gay or lesbian president: “It would be bothersome to me just personally because I consider it immoral.”

Granted it wasn't the only wild thing DeMint said in the interview but that nugget of nuttiness particularly stands out.

I wish the writer, Albert R. Hunt, had allowed DeMint to go into detail about this because it sounds like DeMint was implying that Paul Cameronesque nonsense about “homosexuality being a deadly lifestyle.”

I would have loved for him to be nailed for that lie.

Really though, I have to give DeMint points for consistency. He has never particulary like lgbt people.

Back in 2004 when he ran against Inez Tenenbaum for the seat he won, he talked about banning gay teachers.

“I answered as a dad with my heart and I did not answer as a Senate candidate. I apologize for making the remark because it distracted from the debate,”

Then in June of this year, he wrote a letter to various national religious leaders and pastors inaccurately saying lgbt-inclusive hate crimes legislation would lead them being arrested for merely claiming that homosexuality is a sin.

So the fact that DeMint fears having a gay president doesn't surprise any of us lgbts in South Carolina.

It's just more proof that DeMint doesn't care about us – the people whom he was elected to represent.

13 Responses
to “Sen. Jim DeMint fears a gay president”

That’s the language a good lawyer needs to take to courtCollect all the statements of these political leaders that “Marriage is a religious institution,” and challenge each and every benefit granted to married couples based on separation.
There you are. Go at marriage from both ends, and suddenly they’ll have to admit its not religious and is civil, and then the argument against gay marriage is over.

You may have something here…Every group promoting marriage equality needs to read this. Seriously! IMHO, this could be the key message those groups are looking for to counteract the religious oppostion’s arguments.

Rights aren’t exclusive to religious organizationsGreat point bjohnm.
“Marriage is a religious institution. The federal government has no business redefining what it is,” DeMint says. This is one issue where he doesn’t support states’ rights; state government shouldn’t have the right to permit gay marriage: “Governments should not be in the business of promoting a behavior that’s proven to be destructive to our society.”
If only DeMint stopped and really look at what he said,First,who’s the one who issues marriage licences?,second,who’s the one who over sees procedures and come to a conclusion for both parties when a marriage ends?,third,who,over the years have constantly gotten divorces costing american taxpayers millions if not billions by tieing up courts when courts have better things to do?Four,who are the ones who end up destroying young lives because of their infantile behavior towards one another.I could keep going but I’m sure my point has been made.
If Mr.DeMint and all the others who wish to claim
“Marriage is a religious institution”that shouldn’t be governed by our constitution in a free country and allowed to all of it’s citzens,perhaps Mr.Demint and the rest of them should be the ones to issue licences and over see divorce proceeding along with everything else that entails so our government can go about it’s business and no longer waste it’s time,money and resources on organizational beliefs.Think of the money the government could say.
Then the government being in a free society could issue civil marriage licences to everyone else that’s free in America and only over see them and the consequences.
Of course that would mean Mr.DeMint and all those who think the sameway he does that they would have to register with the government so the government doesn’t enfringe upon their religious rights&freedoms.
Or is Mr.DeMint and others saying they want to live in a country where government is religiously ruled?If so,what religion should govern a free will,free world society?Or is he saying that majority rules and minorities aren’t entitled to the same rights&freedoms in a free country claiming freedom and justice for all.
Sorry for ranting but sometimes I just can’t help myself.

what an ass.“Marriage is a religious institution. The federal government has no business redefining what it is,” DeMint says.
so if it has no business redefining marriage then it also doesn’t have the business of defining either. therefore if there is no definition of marriage then there would be no marriage laws period, nor divorce laws. nullifying estate laws pertaining to spouses;only blood kin can get your stuff, if you don’t leave a will, and the non-spouse would be paying taxes on anything gotten.only blood kin can get your pension. and so on. my insurance would be cheaper now it doesn’t have to cover my spouse.

More than thatBringing to their attention that religion does indeed exist outside of the Judeo-Christian complex and most of them perform marriages for gay couples.
But then, the DeMint types won’t acknowledge, say, Wicca as a “real” religion.